Even on grass, Becker had twice as many winners from ground strokes as from volleys/overheads.

The big shot of the match was Becker’s BH, with 30 winners.

Becker had 22 service return winners, 17 of them off Lendl's second serve. 15 of the winning returns were BH’s. All the returns were passes, and Becker had 18 additional passing shots (15 from the BH), including 1 FH lob.

Lendl hit 7 service return winners, 6 of them off Becker's second serve. Four of the winning returns were FH's. All of the returns were passes, and Lendl had 13 additional passing shots; nine were BH’s, including two lobs.

ERRORS

If I subtract the clean winners and aces from the total points won:

Becker made 100 total errors (forced and unforced). Of those I counted 54 return errors and 11 df’s. That leaves him making 35 errors in points that had at least a successful return (ie, in rallies).

Lendl made 96 total errors (forced and unforced). Of those I counted 44 return errors and 7 df’s. That leaves him making 45 errors in rallies.

Per the St. Louis Dispatch, Becker had 18 aces and 21 service winners, Lendl 9 aces and 20 service winners.

Becker created 21 break points against Lendl, but Lendl had only six against Becker, who passed him at the net regularly with his big strokes. Lendl often played Becker to a virtual stalemate even so, killing 16 of the break points.

Click to expand...

The St. Petersburg Times (Florida):

In fact, in his final seven service games, Becker only allowed Lendl five points - none in the final game. He finished with 17 aces and 100 winners, compared to nine and 86 for Lendl.

Click to expand...

My own count confirms that Becker allowed 5 points in his last 7 service games.

This source has Becker at 17 aces, not the 18 of the St. Louis-Dispatch or the 19 of the Washington Post. (I have him at 17 clean aces). All the sources have Lendl at 9 (as I do).

continued:

Becker ripped two consecutive backhand service returns - one for a winner, the other for a forced error at Lendl's feet, to get the break point. Becker had used the same shot 14 other times for service return winners, probably adding to Lendl's nervousness on the next point, which he double-faulted to even the score at 3-3.

Click to expand...

The Sunday Times (London):

Becker was a revelation. His strength we know about. His 150mph service, though still erratic, was thumping in. But now there was a backhand that was becoming his winning shot. He must have been working on it. It is delayed, taken at full stretch, often low down and with an immense amount of wrist to flick it up and dip it across the net. A shot almost from table tennis.

Lendl was up a break in the 4th, did he have any points for 5-2 or 5-3?

did Lendl S&V on both 1st & 2nd serves throughout?

this is from SI:

The day before, Becker had needed a 76-minute rain delay in his semifinal with top-seeded Ivan Lendl to compose his usual flighty self. Down 0-3 in the third set after having split the first two, Becker headed for the locker room, "shattered," in the view of Lendl , who was playing magnificently in his continued quest to win the lone Grand Slam title that has eluded him. Only after two dubious line calls went against Lendl in the fourth set and Becker strung together 11 straight points in the fifth—when Lendl was again flogged by questionable officiating—did Becker secure the 7-5, 6-7, 2-6, 6-4, 6-3 victory. "The rain was good for me," he said. "I could think again."

Yes. And it was just like what he experienced against Cash. Coming in behind his second serve he was consistently beaten by backhand returns at his feet or beyond his reach. It cost him more than anything in the match, with 15 return winners from Becker’s backhand (12 off second serve), and many other forced errors.

It just makes you wonder how he would have done if he’d stayed back on his second serves (like Borg), or at least on some of them. Becker could come in himself on Lendl’s second serve, or pummel it anyway, if it wasn’t placed well. But so long as Lendl placed it well, he’d either get an error from Becker or get into a rally, and from there the point was likely his. With Lendl charging in behind everything, though, Becker was just lining up the ball in his sights and ripping it.

I didn't think the rain delay was as consequential as it had seemed when I watched it back then. Lendl had a harder time holding serve right up through the end of the second set. He took the tiebreak then, and broke Becker twice to go up 3-love in the third when the rains came. But to get that lead he had to hold in a long game, saving two break points. It was a brief time that he got on top of Becker, and when they came back Lendl took the third set anyway; it’s not as if the rain helped Becker to get a set that had been slipping away from him. It did help to calm him down, but after the rain delay there were still times that he yelled at himself.

Lendl got close to winning it in four sets, but there were problems with his performance and you can see it in the stats. After four sets he had served 178 points, Becker just 123. I don't know for sure, but have we ever seen a case of the winner having to work so much harder to hold serve? Eventually all that work wears you down and you make some errors (and in Lendl's case, you start to complain openly about how hard you're working), so in a sense he was not as close to winning it as the score suggests after three and a half sets.

It just makes you wonder how he would have done if he’d stayed back on his second serves (like Borg), or at least on some of them.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I always wonder about that question myself all the time. He should try it at least for 1 year. He got some s h i t advices from his staffs I guess. I even wrote Lendl a few letters about this back then.

Becker was 42 of 91(46%) on first serves. In the 3rd set they said he was 48% for the tournament. I'm curious what Becker's highest 1st serve % was over a season, from many of his famous matches, it doesn't seem like he got over 50% that much(but he was 67% in his loss vs Edberg the year before, so go figure)

Becker was 42 of 91(46%) on first serves. In the 3rd set they said he was 48% for the tournament. I'm curious what Becker's highest 1st serve % was over a season, from many of his famous matches, it doesn't seem like he got over 50% that much

Click to expand...

I know Stich served at only 46% in the '91 final, but I can't think of another player that won a Slam serving at such a low percentage.

Becker had an underrated backhand cross return on grass. Tiriac always stated, that this shot helped him even more than his serving. Lendl's problem was his backhand volley. I am surprised, that he made so many in this match. Also his second serve had not enough spin, his serve from a very high toss was too straight and better equipped for hard or indoor courts.

Becker was 42 of 91(46%) on first serves. In the 3rd set they said he was 48% for the tournament. I'm curious what Becker's highest 1st serve % was over a season, from many of his famous matches, it doesn't seem like he got over 50% that much(but he was 67% in his loss vs Edberg the year before, so go figure)

Great info Krosero on this match. Lendl was so close to win winning that match. There were so many tough matches at Wimbledon between Becker and his chief rivals during this time.

I just wanted to mention something about Ion Tiriac, the eccentric genius that was a former doubles partner to Nastase, and coach of both Vilas and Becker. Do you all know that he's likely the richest guy with a deep tennis connection these days? He has become a BILLIONAIRE in Romania as a banker! He is the first billionaire in Romania.

See this wikipedia excerpt:

Business career

After his retirement as a professional tennis player, Ţiriac became a businessman in Germany. In 1987, he appeared in a TV commercial for Miller Lite beer with Bob Uecker, who extols Ţiriac's supposed humourous qualities, laughing hysterically while Ţiriac sits stone-faced. [2]

Following the collapse of communism in Romania, he started numerous businesses and investments back home. In 1990, he founded Banca Ţiriac, the first private bank in post-Communist Romania. Between that and several other enterprises (retail, insurance, auto leasing, auto dealerships, airlines, etc.), his fortune was estimated at over $900 million as of 2005[update].

Ion Ţiriac became the first Romanian[3] to enter Forbes' List of billionaires in the 2007 Forbes rankings, placing number 840 in the world. His wealth was estimated at $1.1 billion as of 2007[update], according to the magazine.

Yeah, I always wonder about that question myself all the time. He should try it at least for 1 year. He got some s h i t advices from his staffs I guess. I even wrote Lendl a few letters about this back then.

Click to expand...

Ivan USED to stay back on grass quite a bit....and was losing to the likes of Mac ('83?)and Connors ('84), who were simply just more nimble and comfortable on the surface. The '84 semi between Jimmy & Ivan is an interesting one...Ivan really should've had the edge there, but Jimmy out foxed him. Would be intrigued to see some stats on these "pre S&V" matches for Ivan...

Ivan USED to stay back on grass quite a bit....and was losing to the likes of Mac ('83?)and Connors ('84), who were simply just more nimble and comfortable on the surface. The '84 semi between Jimmy & Ivan is an interesting one...Ivan really should've had the edge there, but Jimmy out foxed him. Would be intrigued to see some stats on these "pre S&V" matches for Ivan...

Click to expand...

I watched the '83 match with Mac recently & Lendl was S&Ving on every 1st & 2nd serve(& having a good win % at it)

Yet he hardly came in vs Connors in '84, I'm guessing since he wasn't under the threat of someone chip & charging on him like Mac.

I've tried to collect as many Lendl grasscourt matches as I can over the years to see any changes he made in his game.

I watched the '83 match with Mac recently & Lendl was S&Ving on every 1st & 2nd serve(& having a good win % at it)

Yet he hardly came in vs Connors in '84, I'm guessing since he wasn't under the threat of someone chip & charging on him like Mac.

I've tried to collect as many Lendl grasscourt matches as I can over the years to see any changes he made in his game.

Click to expand...

Clearly, my memory fails me on the '83 match; I know Mac got the better of him, but don't remember him serving and volleying then. I know he had also played Connors at Queens in the early 80's and got thrashed. But, hard to see his logic if he was S&V'ing against Mac and staying back against Jimmy. I don't quite get it...unless he felt he could keep Mac guessing? And, maybe in the case of Jimmy, he didn't want to get passed? I really thought his best shot to win was against Cash in '87, but even then, he couldn't quite nullifying Cash's hard charging game. Cash put on quite a show that year, beating Wilander, Connors and Lendl in succession.

I'm changing my mind on this the more I see of Lendl's grasscourt matches. I saw him get burned so often against Cash and Becker by serving to the backhand and getting one difficult return after another -- esp. on second serve. But the more I see of him on grass the less I'm impressed with his defense. Everybody says he wasn't the greatest volleyer, and of course that's true; but he wasn't all that bad. And his serve was just fine. Where he seems really different from baseliners who won Wimbledon (Borg/Connors) is that he doesn't return as well, doesn't move as well; and the lack of a true bounce seems to mess with his style of playing.

I've been watching his AO semi to Edberg, the one he lost 9-7 in the fifth in '85, and he's staying back some. He's still coming in, but when he stays back it's not as if the point is guaranteed to be his. On true surfaces he can roll those groundstrokes and swing freely -- that's his terminator mode -- but on grass he just can't get in that groove.

And when he stayed firmly on the baseline it didn't go well for him: the loss to Connors at 84W, a straight-set loss to Wilander at 83AO. I haven't seen the Connors match, but against Wilander he looks totally confused. He can't dominate Mats from the baseline the way he could on other fast surfaces, but he's not trying to end the points at net either.

So I think Lendl was in a pickle when it came to winning on grass. There weren't going to be any easy solutions.

I don't think anyone was beating Cash at 87W, but earlier in the year at the AO Lendl played Cash to a draw all the way through to a third-set tiebreak. Very close match. That could have been his best chance.

I always got the impression with Lendl on grass that he needed a good bounce to return serve well so his backhand and his forehand suffered. His footwork on grass also wasn't that good as opposed to a Borg, Connors or McEnroe.

You combine all of this with his average volley and despite his great serve and overall groundies and he's going to have problems with top grass court players.

I don't recall this being called the longest Wimbledon semifinal in history, but apparently it held the record until today. Becker and Lendl played 4 hours 1 minute; Djokovic and Del Potro took up 4 hours 43 minutes today.

Becker had 23 unreturned serves(3 were service winners)
Edberg had 25(2 service winners)

Click to expand...

9 of Becker's unreturned serves were 2nd serves.
10 of Edberg's.

There was an interesting streak involving Edberg's serve in the 2nd set. He won 14 straight pts on serve to get to 6-5, 40-0. Then Becker won 9 straight pts on Edberg's serve to break and win the tiebreak.

I checked to see if there were any patterns on those pts. During Edberg's 14 pt streak Becker hit 10 returns off the bh wing, 4 off the fh. During his 9 pt win streak on return he hit 7 bh's, 2 fh's.

Lendl also did not find a solution to Leconte´s all round play in the 1985 4 th round.IMO, this was his last real bad match at Wimbledon since, from 1986 on, he did his best and accomplished more than he possibly expected.

He couldn´t get by the extremely consistent S&V game of Mc Enroe,Becker or Cash.But he could get stuck until the end of the match in 1984 against old Dick Stockton and in 1986 against the boomer from Yugoslavia,Slobo Zivojinovic.He also beat usually a good S&V such as Tim Mayotte.

I don´t think he could have got through Stich,Edberg or Sampras in case he had played them in 1991,1992 or 1993.

There was an interesting streak involving Edberg's serve in the 2nd set. He won 14 straight pts on serve to get to 6-5, 40-0. Then Becker won 9 straight pts on Edberg's serve to break and win the tiebreak.

I checked to see if there were any patterns on those pts. During Edberg's 14 pt streak Becker hit 10 returns off the bh wing, 4 off the fh. During his 9 pt win streak on return he hit 7 bh's, 2 fh's.

Click to expand...

Interstingly, I believe Edberg also held at love in his first game in the third set. So those 9 pts Becker won against his serve was preceeded by 3 holds at love, then 3 points to 40-0 at 6-5 and then finally followed by a hold at love. Edberg just needed the one point to maybe get back in the match.

I'm also not sure how helpful staying back would have been for Lendl, partly because I think it's a mistake to think he would mostly win long rallies against more natural grass courters. Someone like Edberg could throw in a slice that would really trouble him. And Becker could just clobber the ball enough times to get a few breaks.

I was at the 1995 Wimbledon final. Becker was getting burned so badly by Sampras's returns of his second serve that I at one point suggested to my friend that he stay back on second serve. Not just my friend but some people near us reacted as though I was crazy.

Twenty years on, it's hard to know who was right. Looked at from a contemporary perspective, it seems that staying back on second serve wasn't such a bad idea after all. But so many players felt they had to come in on it that I think there was some wisdom to the view.